 |
 |
Yes, David, I would say we do suffer from the revolution of rising expectations generated by the 17th century Age of Science which produced the 18th century Enlightenment. My mother volunteered with the American Cancer Society in the 1 950's and people are still dying too young. Jerry Lewis has done telethons for MS for over 50 years. I just wish people who don't understand IVF would recuse themselves from the argument. I want to clarify the recent dustup over the Lanza research......Dr. Lanza & Co. apparently took enough cells from the blastocysts to destroy them because they felt that they didn't need to prove a cell can be taken from an embryo without destroying it as that has been an established practice with IVF genetic biopsy or diagnosis for years. No, I don't know how many years. It allows the embryos' donors to decide if they want to use it or not if it has a gene for say cystic fibrosis. What Lanza et al were demonstrating was that a single cell could generate a stem cell line and since these lines are in short supply they made as many as possible, probably a bad idea as it confused the issue for opponents who pay little attention to IVF practices and are uncomfortable with any tinkering with the stuff of life. The position of the Catholic Church is consistent on IVF, hESCR, capital punishment and the Iraq War, but there is really little active opposition to IVF. I just think it is too bad that this research must be acceptable to people who don't understand it or have a faith-based belief that affects everyone whether they share it or not.. I thought that iron curtain of opposition to science had been pierced for good, but I was wrong. I expect too much. Ray .--- Original Message ----- From: "DAVID LEWIN" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:01 AM Subject: Re: What we face > Dear Ray, > Thank you for your posting. As an investor in many biotech stocks that > have > sought cures for cancer, I can tell you that there is a strong economic > push > to come up with a cure. The problem is that a living cell and organism is > so fantastically complex. As to why they can't come up with a cheap > transportation fuel, the same problem applies: our knowledge of physics is > still too primitive. We don't even know where 80% of the matter in the > universe is.(the dark matter). We have made so much comparative progress > in > the last two hudred years that we are overly impressed with our > Lilliuputin > results. Conspiracy theory isn't necessary here. And I wouldn't worry > about the temporary set back because of conservative politics. Despite > the > arrest and imprisonment of Gailleo, scientific progress has sky-rocketed > right to the moon. Thank you for your efforts. David > >>From: rayilynlee <[log in to unmask]> >>Reply-To: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network >><[log in to unmask]> >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: What we face >>Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:58:01 -0700 >> >>Below is the response I received from my late great-aunt's daughter-in-law >>who lives in Missouri when I asked her if she did or did not want to >>receive >>posts I get from Diane Wyshak on the stem cell wars in Missouri. I do >>appreciate her candor, but am beginning to to think the uninterested and >>the >>cynical (although I share some of her cynicism re the drug companies) pose >>a >>greater obstacle than the Brownbacks and Bushes to cures. She is a well >>born-again Baptist with healthy grandchildren, but her response kind of >>surprised me. I take comfort in the knowledge that change does not >>require >>that everyone participate. Only 1/3 of the people supported the American >>Revolution. Ray >> >>"I really won't read most of them...know that I think most of the debate >>is >>tied up in politics. >> >>I don't believe it is all George Bush and the conservatives fault...and >>that there will be drastic changes if a democrat is elected. I believe >>that just as with cancer research, there is no economic reason for them to >>find a real cure as many would be out of work. The patent and rights to >>market the cure would cause such a tug of war amongst the pharmasudical >>(sp) >>companies. It does all boil down to the mighty dollar...unless we could >>get Bill Gates or Warren Buffett behind it and beat them all to it we will >>not likely see anything on the market for another decade. Tonight Andy >>Rooney showed predictions aired on their 60 Minutes program in 1986--they >>said there would be a cure for cancer by 2001--there should have been but >>just as creating cars to get a standard 50 miles to the gallon or hose >>that >>won't run, it is not economically feasible...too many mouths to feed. It >>will merely be a political platform for the candidates--they will use it >>for >>their gain-not to cure disease....sad but true." >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >>mailto:[log in to unmask] >>In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn